4 ms·
Because it's the customers fault manufacturers sell insecure routers that go out of service 2 years later?
by squigz 3y ago
Because it's the customers fault manufacturers sell insecure routers that go out of service 2 years later?
- candiddevmike 3y agoAt some point consumers need to become more computer savvy and responsible netzens.
- sgc 3y agoSounds more like we need a minimum required period for security updates after a device is sold, and other similar measures. It is much, much easier to enforce this type of thing with one manufacturer than with 100k customers, many of whom are elderly and will never be able to do it themselves no matter how much we preach.
- mschuster91 3y ago> It is much, much easier to enforce this type of thing with one manufacturer than with 100k customers, many of whom are elderly and will never be able to do it themselves no matter how much we preach. They all pay their ISP a hefty "rental" fee for their crap modem. It's only fair to hold the ISPs responsible in such cases.
- sgc 3y agoThat type of thing is why I threw in "and other similar measures". Of course there needs to be a basic security policy that is developed and enforced, and resellers / lessors should be responsible. We already have plenty to draw from, such as car/appliance recalls, large organization security policies, etc. There is a ton of low hanging fruit that could be easily dealt with quickly if there were political will.
- gunapologist99 3y agoThis is how you end up getting forced to be behind their awful DNAT DPI "firewall", which will still be insecure, and you won't have any access to it.
- Arrath 3y agoSounds like an empty feel good platitude for the technically minded to feel superior to the rubes buying crap from manufacturers who put out that insecure crap in the first place. Yes, everyone could be more responsible about their consumption but why should that free the manufacturers from the responsibility of making competent products to begin with?
- recursive 3y agoI'm a software developer, and I've thought about my home router almost never. I've updated it exactly never. I'm using the default one from my ISP, and I think I'm paying a monthly rental fee for the privilege. I don't know how to tell whether my router is vulnerable, or what I could even do about it. If I'm not savvy enough for your proposed rules, which does seem quite possible, I don't think most people have much hope.
- 4gotunameagain 3y agoAny responsible citizen would respect the right of their fellow citizens to not be computer savvy, in an age where technology is eating us apart. It is the job of the techies to fix techie problems. When a bridge shakes beyond specs, it is the job of engineers to fix it, bridge building is not crowdsourced to society.
- FpUser 3y agoI am computer savvy but I have better things to do vs researching innards of every tech gizmo I own.
- function_seven 3y agoNo, but those devices are their responsibility. Car analogies are always fun, so here's one: The catalytic converter on my car is sawzalled off in the middle of the night. I drive around with the missing cat for a couple months. Then I fail a smog check, or get a ticket for loud exhaust. Is it my fault the cat was stolen? No, but I still have a responsibility to everyone else to not pollute (fumes or noise). If the ISP supplies the router, then of course they should correct it. But if the subscriber brings their own equipment, then they take on the responsibility of maintaining it. Including replacement if it turns out not to be fit for purpose.
- millzlane 3y agoI say we punish the car manufacturers for making easy to steal catalytic converters. Take it all the way up the chain. It's their responsibility for designing a flawed product they knew was flawed. It's not your fault the cat was stolen. It was the manufacturers.
- nrb 3y agoBut in this case it wasn't your fault that the cat was stolen, it is however completely your fault to continue to operate an illegal vehicle no matter how the vehicle came into that condition.
- FpUser 3y ago>"It's not your fault the cat was stolen. It was the manufacturers." Not, it is a fault of thieves. And maybe a police who prefer to generate ticketing revenue rather then go after real criminals.
- sophacles 3y agoI don't think that's a good analogy. Car manufacturers are required to do recalls on cars that have airbags that explode rather than inflate. Even 20 year old clunkers. They widely publicize cars they think aren't actually safe anymore so customers can choose to update. When food is shipped out to customers full of listeria, they don't say "you should have kept a full pcr lab in the kitchen and tested every bite, this is obviously the eater's fault", they flood the news with recall notices and take the food back and offer a refund. (and often are still sued because they too have responsibility). The firewall stopped doing it's job, if it had done it's job properly the device wouldn't have been owned. Why shouldn't firewall manufacturers be required to have some responsibility when the firewall is shown to not actually firewall?